Accused murderer Karen Read’s defense team is promising to file a new motion to dismiss her case — this time for “extraordinary governmental misconduct.”
The pending declaration was a footnote in a motion filed this week demanding that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts pay for the costs incurred by an expert, Matthew Erickson, who made a “futile” trip from out of state to analyze security camera footage from the Canton Police Department after being invited by prosecutors to do so.
Upon the arrival of the IT and mobile device forensic analyst at USAForensic LLC to Canton from Phoenix, Arizona, however, the footage was already destroyed, according to the motion.
“Because the Commonwealth failed to preserve the original video evidence, Mr. Erickson’s trip to Massachusetts was futile,” the motion signed by defense attorneys Alan Jackson and David Yannetti states.
“Accordingly, in the interests of justice, this Court should order that the Commonwealth, not Ms. Read, pay the cost of having her expert travel out-of-state to obtain a copy of the video surveillance footage, which the Canton Police Department (an agent of the Commonwealth) failed to adequately preserve.”
The “misrepresentation” came at a “significant expense to Ms. Read,” the motion states: $12,229.57.
However, a footnote on page 2 shows that this is merely an appetizer for a much larger motion.
“A Motion to Dismiss for Extraordinary Governmental Misconduct based on the destruction of this, and other, exculpatory evidence is forthcoming,” the footnote reads. “This motion should not be deemed a waiver of any such claims or issues.”
Motions to dismiss are par for the course in this case that has captured headlines for years.
Ahead of Read’s first trial last year, a document dump revealed a previously sealed 49-page motion to dismiss. This motion was based on alleged failures of the prosecutor’s presentation of the case to the grand jury, which they say was “predicated entirely on flimsy speculation and presumption,” and the victim of “questionable and biased investigation.”
Then came the mistrial, followed by a string of defense appeals, based particularly on the defense’s claims that a number of jurors had said the jury wasn’t actually hung on all three charges against Read, but just one of them — and hadn’t known they could deliver a partial verdict.
Read, 44, of Mansfield, is accused of striking Boston Police Officer John O’Keefe, her boyfriend of two years, with her car and leaving him to freeze and die on a Canton front lawn on Jan. 29, 2022. For that she was indicted on three charges: second-degree murder (Count 1), manslaughter while operating a motor vehicle under the influence (Count 2) and leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death (Count 3).
The jurors allegedly indicated it was only Count 2, OUI manslaughter, they couldn’t reach a decision on and that they were ready to acquit on the others. Because of this, Read’s attorneys say, it would be “Double Jeopardy” to charge her with murder a second time. Norfolk Superior Court Judge Beverly J. Cannone denied that motion and the defense team has since appealed to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.
Read’s second trial is scheduled to begin on April 16.